ON COMPENSATORS

[Gabriel Suarez]

I got an email today, in essence asking why we are doing anything with compensators on carry guns. It was inquiring but also a bit accusatory suggesting we had turned our backs on the purity of the carry weapon...after all Cooper never used one of those things.

I read it over a few times. The days of the quick response are gone, and I tend to let emails like this sit for a day or two rather than punch the writer in the junk. But I suspect he is not the only one with that question so here goes with a post on the matter.

The goal of the pistol is to kill an adversary, and his friends that may be joining him, quickly and from a situation of unreadiness. But the original paradigm of assault in 1976 dealt with maybe a single attacker...the mugger in the parking lot with the sharpened screw driver. Moreover, the ammunition available in those days was hardly developed at all like it is today. I recall a group I listened to carefully was using 45 ACP S&W 4506 and Colt 1911s with Hornady Flat Points. That was all that was available. They really liked the Speer 200gr JHP (flying ashtrays), but they were nt sufficiently reliable in their carry weapons!

Today, after a 20 year war against Terror, and a couple of decades prior of development, the ammunition choices we have is staggering. As is the reliability standards of a modern pistol and not to mention the leaps in skill development that have taken place by not being locked down to old doctrines. And before we forget, so has the paradigm of conflict. Today the conflict may still be as it was in 1976, bit more than likely it can be ab active shooter armed with a rifle...or a group of them. It could be a religious or politically motivated group of thugs bent of your death because of who you voted for. And you may be dealing with ballistic vests, worn IEDs, or simply a tougher larger adversary that has been fortified by years of lifting and pharmaceutical enhancement that is not concerned with "one shot stops".

Anyone that has an understanding of killing will understand that it is not a clean thing. Rarely is it one shot and then done. Often it requires what some may term butchery with bullets. So the ability to place multiple rounds on target in rapid succession is a huge asset. That is why a fully automatic SMG has the ability to damage tissue with a greater effect than a semi auto SMG.

Placing those rounds is affected by a number of things, many of which we have addressed trough the years.

1). Accuracy. That is a factor of shooter skill but also a factor of the weapon's capacity to express that for the shooter. That capacity is made up of the sights (we use Red Dot Systems), the barrel and ammo (Match barrels and high quality ammunition), the shootability of the weapon (better trigger linkage, grip surface, etc.).

2). Recoil mitigation. Nobody ever won a gunfight by having more recoil. Recoil is actually the wrong word. The right term is muzzle flip. We refer to the upward and backward movement of the pistol as the round is fired. And yes, 9mm does in fact recoil. Muzzle flip causes the weapon to move off the target and the shooter to lose visual focus on the sights (iron or optics).

If we can reduce the recoil by ANY DEGREE, we will enable the shooter to keep the muzzle on target longer, recover from any muzzle movement sooner, and not lose sight of the sights or optics during the process. Thus he can keep placing more and more bullets into the target until it succumbs to injury and dies.

And even if you do well at that now...without a compensator...you will do it BETTER if you have a compensator.

[Papa]

If we can reduce the recoil by ANY DEGREE, we will enable the shooter to keep the muzzle on target longer, recover from any muzzle movement sooner, and not lose sight of the sights or optics during the process. Thus he can keep placing more and more bullets into the target until it succumbs to injury and dies.

And even if you do well at that now...without a compensator...you will do it BETTER if you have a compensator.

Emphasis added, as well as this: time is of the essence. The faster you can inflict that injury the better. This is a race you need to win.

[Brent Yamamoto]

People have an almost religious attachment to their choices. Anything that differs from their personal choice is silly...and some things are downright heretical.

I also think that there is an element of not wanting others to do well or get ahead. The fancy doo-dads give an unfair advantage over the purist who is not willing to modify his gun, so anything different must be vilified. It's like wishing ill on your friend who has just won the lottery rather than being happy for him.

Enough gun writers have pounded the idea into people that a carry gun MUST be stock that many simply accept it...and anything that deviates from the norm must be crushed.


I'm a purist too...in the sense that I'm purely interested in performance. I'm interested in anything that will improve my performance.


I understand the guy who just likes his stock gun just because he likes it that way, and I don't judge him for his choices. It's still a mostly free country.

What I really don't understand is why so many care about the choices of others; I know that what they are really doing is trying to validate their own choices but this need for validation is something I don't understand. I think some people came programmed that way from the factory...I simply seem to be missing that programming altogether.

People don't like being judged but seem to have no issue judging others.

[Greg Nichols]

Early in my experience I was burned on the use of comps from competition competing in my head with actual experience. I'd see gun gamers with comps and loads tuned down so low that the weapons barely functioned but recoiled like a .22. These were great for the game but horrible for a fight. Additionally you'd see things like tungsten guide rods to make the gun heavier to manage recoil.

The beautiful thing about these SI comps is that you don't have to tune your load and or springs to make it function appropriately with a wide range of ammo without effecting reliability or creating a muzzle signature that would blind you at night, and adds a negligible amount of weight to the system.

[Papa]

Loyalty to a gun model, company or shooting style? Loyalty is for God and the people you value. Use what works best for you.

"I'd see gun gamers with comps and loads tuned down so low that the weapons barely functioned but recoiled like a .22. These were great for the game but horrible for a fight. Additionally you'd see things like tungsten guide rods to make the gun heavier to manage recoil." --Greg Nichols

And the guns were huge, only semi-reliable, and had lots of pointy bits.

A reliable turnkey carry gun that is compensated, accurized, properly sighted and conceals well...too bad no one makes one of those.

[Gabriel Suarez]

We saw loyalty to the AK when I dropped it. Many took their balls and went home. And I am seeing that now when I dared to suggest that the Holosun is a good alternative to the RMR. Simple reason...it is easier to be a zealot true-believer than to think things through for yourself.

Loyalty to a gun model, company or shooting style? Loyalty is for God and the people you value. Use what works best for you.

"I'd see gun gamers with comps and loads tuned down so low that the weapons barely functioned but recoiled like a .22. These were great for the game but horrible for a fight. Additionally you'd see things like tungsten guide rods to make the gun heavier to manage recoil." --Greg Nichols

And the guns were huge, only semi-reliable, and had lots of pointy bits.

A reliable turnkey carry gun that is compensated, accurized, properly sighted and conceals well...too bad no one makes one of those.

[John_Frederick]

If one is going to decry Compensators, where does one draw the line?
What about better iron sights, or God forbid, Red Dots?
Or Magwells, Triggers, Extended Magazines, or any alteration to the grip.
It's a stupid argument to even attempt.
One must examine and evaluate each modification and decide if it's right for them, and STFU about the choices others make that may diverge from one's own.
If SI required every pistol built to include a Compensator the Complainant would have an argument, but since it is simply an additional available option he is full of shit... and I hope he enjoys those plastic sights Glock ships on their pistols.

[Mike OTDP]

This is a fight that has been going on for at least 25 years, when the first carry comps were introduced. Shooters tend to be inherently conservative, often very much so. Let's be honest, the rest of the world kissed the revolver goodbye before the First World War...even the British ditched it after World War II. But it dominated the American market until around 1980.

I can understand to an extent - you do not shoot historically correct muzzle-loading arms because they are the "New, Improved" thing. There's a sporting principle involved.

But on the street, the only rule is survival. Which means the maximum performance available. When I read a book on the "modern technique" and the author stated that he had a philosophical objection to compensators, I knew he wasn't really serious about gunfighting.

[Gabriel Suarez]

Can you get the same effect of flat shooting guns with a large grip to slide. Examples G45/19X and STI 2011. I have the G45 and 2011. They are flat and fast guns. I've stayed away from compensators for what might be the misunderstood lability of the ports in contact distance shooting.

NO...YOU CAN'T. STUDY MORE...SPECIALLY THE STUFF HERE ON WT

[Gabriel Suarez]